Gov. Newsom’s vaccine safety panel will have short timeline to reinforce confidence

Group to issue recommendation 24 hours after FDA
Posted at 4:00 PM, Nov 25, 2020
and last updated 2020-11-26 20:56:11-05

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) — Governor Gavin Newsom’s vaccine safety task force will have to work quickly once the FDA announces a decision on Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine candidate.

The 11-member panel, officially called the Scientific Safety Review Workgroup, has been tasked with reviewing the safety and efficacy of vaccine trials and rendering a recommendation on their use in California.

The workgroup has a difficult mission: review the data thoroughly enough to offer a recommendation independent from the FDA, but do it fast enough to avoid delaying distribution of the vaccine.

Pfizer’s emergency use authorization application spans thousands of pages.

The workgroup has already reviewed Pfizer’s early-stage clinical trial data from phases 1 and 2 and found no cause for concern, Governor Gavin Newsom said. They’re still waiting to get their hands on the all-important Phase 3 data, which included thousands of participants.

Panel member Dr. Rodney Hood, the president of the Multicultural Health Foundation, acknowledged the task force will have to complete its review of the Phase 3 data “very, very quickly.” Dr. Hood is one of two members from the San Diego region, along with Dr. Mark Sawyer of Rady Children’s Hospital.

“We certainly don't want to introduce any unnecessary delay in the vaccine being available to Californians,” Dr. Sawyer said.

The FDA has scheduled a meeting of its vaccine advisory committee, known by its acronym VRBPAC (pronounced verb-pack), on Dec. 10. The agency said it will make Pfizer’s Phase 3 data available at least two days before that meeting.

At the end of that meeting, a group of about 20 experts on the advisory committee will vote on whether to recommend emergency authorization of the vaccine. The FDA is expected to issue a decision shortly after, although the agency does not have to abide by the advisory committee’s recommendation.

“The California committee is on notice to be ready for a meeting either later in the day on the 10th or on December 11,” said Dr. Sawyer.

Dr. Sawyer was recently added to VRBPAC, so he will cast a vote on whether to recommend approval of the vaccine at the national level before participating in California’s process.

“It is going to take a few days for the vaccine to really start flowing,” he said. “I don't think the [California] committee is going to introduce extra delay.”

The California committee has promised to issue its decision within 24 hours of the FDA’s to avoid slowing down distribution, but that means the members may have as few as three days to review the safety and efficacy data.

Federal regulators will spend about three weeks reviewing the thousands of pages of data submitted as part of Pfizer’s application. VRBPAC and the California Scientific Safety Review Workgroup will render decisions based on summaries prepared by the FDA, Dr. Sawyer said.

Both doctors say they have confidence in the FDA’s process and acknowledge it would be very unlikely for the California workgroup to break with the agency’s recommendation. They said the mission of their review is to add an extra layer of verification after complaints the Trump administration was exercising political pressure on the FDA.

“I think the governor foresaw that it was going to be very important that the general community accept these vaccines, assuming they're approved and are safe and effective, because otherwise we're not going to get out of this pandemic,” Dr. Sawyer said.

The doctors say they want to make sure that community acceptance extends across all demographics, so they’ll be looking closely at the numbers to see if various ethnic or racial groups had different responses to the vaccine.

Based on research on past vaccines, a differential response is not expected, Dr. Hood said. However, COVID-19 does strike Latinos and African-Americans more severely, making vaccine acceptance among minority communities all the more critical.

“I want to look at the data, get an assessment of risk-benefit and the question I ask is, would I take it? Number one. Number two, if I would take it, would I recommend it to my family?” he said.

The doctors said they will also closely examine reports of side effects.

Early data suggests both Pfizer and Moderna’s candidates have somewhat harder-hitting side effects than the typical flu vaccine. Dr. Sawyer compared the side effects to the recent shingles vaccine.

“Your arm hurts for a day or two. You may not feel well. You may feel a little bit under the weather for the first 24 hours. You could even have a mild fever or headache,” he said, noting those symptoms typically resolve within 24 to 48 hours based on the data available so far.

“That's actually a good sign. You want that to happen,” he added.

Those sorts of short-term side effects are signs the body is building a strong immune response. They’re evidence the vaccines work as well as advertised, but the doctors say they won’t know for certain until they review the final numbers.